About your Search

20120928
20121006
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
by that is one of the reasons many of these voter i.d. laws were passed is they did not understand the implications on the state level. so many people were outraged with the trayvon martin killing, but the district attorney decided not to press charges was elected. most of the issues that affect people every day our local issues, but i believe that national organizations put so much emphasis on the top of the ticket they are ignoring vital state, gubernatorial, state, county commissioner, all those down-ballot races, and when you are talking about the military- industrial complex, those are district attorney's charging people, judge-citizens charging people, so speak to how you are educating your constituents to understand down-ballot races matter, and even more so, then the top of the ticket? >> it is also different states. if you complained about extremism in the republican party or the support by minorities of the democratic party, you self-gerrymander the country, counties, and districts. what is transpiring is you can make sure you -- but you are giving up on south carolina. t
health care law last june. so how might mitt romney change the high court if he becomes president of the united states? he's already giving all of us some major clues. let's bring in cnn's crime and justice correspondent joe johns who's taking a closer look. what are you seeing? >> the supreme court doesn't get talked about that much on the campaign trail. but choosing a justice is one of the most important things a president does. it's how on administration puts its mark on some of the nation east toughest, most divisive issues. and we have a look at how mitt romney might handle it if he's president. whenever mitt romney fielded questions during the primaries about his picks for the supreme court, he was armed with a stock republican answer. >> what i would look to do would be to appoint people to the supreme court that will follow strictly the constitution as opposed to to legislating from the bench. >> reporter: but he wouldn't choose a favorite. >> would you pick one, please? >> yes, roberts, thomas, alito and scalia. >> reporter: all that changed in june when roberts cast the
treatments are given. that's explicitly prohibited in the law. but let's go back to what governor romney indicated, that under his plan he would be able to cover people with pre-existing conditions. well, actually, governor, that isn't what your plan does. what your plan does is to duplicate what's already the law, which says if you are out of health insurance for three months then you can end up getting continuous coverage and an insurance company can't deny you if it's been under 90 days. but that's already the law, and that doesn't help the millions of people out there with pre-existing conditions. there's a reason why governor romney set up the plan that he did in massachusetts. it wasn't a government takeover of health care. it was the largest expansion of private insurance. but what it does say is that insurers, you've got to take everybody. now, that also means that you've got more customers. but when governor romney says that he'll replace it with something but can't detail how it will be in fact replaced and the reason he set up the system he did in massachusetts is because ther
what treatments are given. that's explicitly prohibited in the law. but let's go back to what governor romney indicated, that under his plan, he would be able to cover people with pre- existing conditions. that isn't what your plan does. what your plan does is to duplicate what's already the law, which is that if you are out of health insurance for three months, then you can end up in getting continuous coverage and an insurance company can deny you if it's been under 90 days. -- cannot deny you if it's been under 90 days. but that's already the law, and that doesn't help them and the people out there with preexisting editions. -- the millions of people out there with preexisting conditions. there's a reason why governor romney set up the plan he did in massachusetts. it wasn't a government takeover of health care. it was the largest expansion of private insurance. but what it does say is that, insurers, you've got to take everybody. that also means you've got more customers. but when governor romney says he'll replace it with something but cannot detail how it will be replaced and the
lawsuits pending that could negate some of the new laws that are intended to require photo ids for voters? >> first observation is, in terms of the case in maryland, that was one misguided example. never should have happened. the race was not that close. it was a huge mistake by that individual and he paid for it with a time in prison. in terms of your concerns about voter i.d., and having to show id, i live in virginia and just got my voter card. they allow any kind of thing, a utility bill, or anything like that. it is a lot easier to vote then to get on an airplane. if you are worried about fraud, i think that these are reasonable requirements. >> in terms of polling, to the extent that both firms can, we try to pull a registered voter list. registered voters who have presumably -- i mean, we try to sample who have not only registered -- people who have not only registered but voted in the last election. >> in a lot of states, they have to have a photo id. how do you account for that? >> our callers asked you to show them your folder id -- your photo i.d. >> not a lot that you can do.
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)